Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Disinformation and the healthcare system

Permalink:

More Government Control

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE

I have covered the discovery of the
tricks Obamacare has played on hospital systems, insurance companies, union
leaders and large corporations in the last three blogs.

The Obama administration needs all three
groups to cooperate if Obamacare has the slightest chance of success.

Physicians are now starting to react to
Obamacare and its restrictive regulations.

It is clear to me that the Obama
administration has no respect for physicians, their intellectual property,
their surgical skills, their honesty or their character. 

The Obama administration has labeled
physicians as commodities and thieves. Obamacare devalues physicians and figures
whatever reimbursement it offers physicians will accept.

Ezekiel Emanuel M.D., Obamacare policy advisor, expresses a vivid example of this disrespect in
his recent article in the New York Times entitled “Don’t Give Up On Healthcare
Costs.”
 

Dr. Emanuel discusses S.G.R., or the Sustainable Growth Rate
formula. 

The formula is seriously flawed in its attempt to contain rising
healthcare costs. 

The formula is rigged to penalize physicians
yearly for their reimbursement for treating Medicare patients. Every year
Congress waives the penalty for that year. This waiver is commonly known as the
“doc fix.”

The yearly penalty has been accumulating since 2002
so this next year it is scheduled to reduce physician payment by 24.5%.

Neither the AMA nor the traditional media
has articulated the meaning of the S.G.R to the public in a comprehensible way.

The S.G.R provides no incentive for individual
doctors to be more efficient since the target level applies to total nationwide
physician costs.

The cuts from the formula are indiscriminate. The
cuts would affect high quality, cost-effective doctors the same as it would
inefficient free spending physicians. It would also affect underpaid primary
care physicians.

The goal should be to incentivize all physicians to
be efficient and cost effective providers in their treatment and patient recommendations.

Ezekiel Emanual’s disrespect shines through when he
says,

Physicians
desperately want the S.G.R. repealed and replaced
so they can charge what they
want without the potential of massive cuts hanging over them each year.”

Congress agrees with physicians that S.G.R. is seriously flawed. The House Energy and
Commerce Committee is starting to mark up the repeal of the S.R.G formula. It
is going to replace it with a 0.5% yearly increase in physician reimbursement
until 2018. In 2019 the government will link Medicare payment to the quality of
care each physician provides.

The measurement of physician performance will be
measured, by big data provided by the Enhanced Quality Reporting System. The
EHQRS is being developed using the ICM-10 coding system. ICM-10 uses 68,000 codes
vs. 18,000 codes in ICM-9.

Ezekiel Emanual M.D. doesn’t like this
formula. It does not provide incentives for physicians to accept bundle reimbursement
for the treatment of their patients.

Dr. Emanual believes  

fee-for-service
payment incentivizes quantity over quality. Physicians make more money by
ordering more tests, seeing patients more frequently in follow-ups and
providing more treatments. The payment system is a key accelerator driving up
Medicare costs — and therefore the federal government’s deficit”.

Dr. Emanual does not trust physicians to
do the best job possible. He also ignores the defensive medicine issue. He
believes,

“In 2009, the
Congressional Budget Office did a comprehensive assessment of the potential
cost savings from medical malpractice reforms
.

Its conclusions: A
package that included a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages, a $500,000 cap on
punitive damages and a one-year statute of limitations for claims by adults
would save about $11 billion a year
40
percent from reduced malpractice premiums and the rest in the form of fewer
defensive procedures like M.R.I.’s.

 Dr.
Emanuel concluded that $11 billion
dollars a year savings is insignificant because it is a cost saving below $26
billion dollars a year
.
He contends tort reform is a distraction from real
efforts to control healthcare costs and should be ignored. The CBO
scoring information has lead Dr. Emanuel to an inaccurate opinion.

Douglas W. Elmendorf’s,
head of CBO
at the time, conclusion was not nearly as definitive as Dr. Emanuel’s
conclusion.

The malpractice issue of defensive
medicine and over testing is real. The Massachusetts Medical Society survey of
defensive medicine is real. Most physicians in Massachusetts are
liberal/progressive and so the sample is not biased toward conservatives.

The
truth is a full accounting reveals that more than 10 percent of America's
health expenditures per year are spend on tort liability and defensive
medicine.

The
percentage of healthcare costs is even greater when the Massachusetts
Medical Society survey
is taken into account. The amount spent for
defensive medicine can be extrapolated to actual costs from this survey.  

I have
written a series of blogs analyzing the impact Massachusetts Medical Society’s
survey. The extrapolated costs turn out to be about $700 billion dollars a
year. The real cost of defensive medicine is somewhere between $242 and $700
billion dollars a year.

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2009/04/president-obama-if-you-really-want-to-reduce-healthcare-costs-effectively-reform-the-medical-malpractice-tort-system-part-2.html

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2009/04/president-obama-if-you-really-want-to-reduce-healthcare-costs-effectively-reform-the-medical-malpractice-tort-system-part.html

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2009/04/president-obama-if-you-really-want-to-reduce-healthcare-costs-effectively-reform-the-medical-malpractice-tort-system-par.html

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2009/04/president-obama-if-you-really-want-to-reduce-healthcare-costs-effectively-reform-the-medical-malpractice-tort-system-part-2.html

 In
2008 damage awards alone for medical malpractice claims reached $5.9 billion
dollars.
  The total of medical tort costs was $16 billion for legal
costs, underwriting costs and administrative expenses. From 1986 the average
jury award was $100,000. In 2006 the average award increased to $637,000. No
one knows what the award value is for cases settled out of court.

Each
year, 25% of practicing physicians are sued. 90% of physician sued are found
innocent. The average defense cost is $100,000. This cost is not included in
the CBO scoring

The
fear of lawsuits causes most doctors to practice "defensive medicine"
as the interviews of Massachusetts physicians points out.  The result is
unnecessary testing, referrals, and procedures to protect themselves from
allegations of medical negligence.  

A
recent survey of doctors published in the Journal of the American Medical
Association found that 93% of physicians admit to practicing defensive
medicine. A 2008 survey by the Massachusetts Medical Society found that about
25 % of medical procedures are defensive in nature.

This
waste results in increased healthcare insurance premiums. The premium increases
result in an increase of at least 3 million uninsured people per year. When
these uninsured people get sick they avoid going to a physician. This results
in a decrease in work productivity. It is estimated that the annual decrease in
productivity is more than $40 billion dollars a year.

In
states where tort reform has been instituted by placing caps on so-called
non-economic damages, the malpractice costs have decreased 39%. This drop in
costs is a result of decreased malpractice suits. The decrease is economically
bad for the plaintiff attorneys. Annual malpractice premiums have gone down at
least 13%. In fact, the medical malpractice business for plaintiff attorneys
has about dried up in Texas.

Dr. Emanuel and the
administration want to connect the leverage they have with the SGR formula to
getting physicians to accept a bundled rate for treating a patient.

Dr. Emanuel “would tie an
S.G.R. repeal to a slow reduction in fee-for-service payments to those
physicians who do not switch to bundled payments and other payment models.”

In other words, accept risk
for treatment that an insurance company would normally accept risk for while
ignoring the malpractice implications of missing a diagnosis or not seeing a
patient at appropriate intervals.

Isn’t the government going
to test physician’s treatment with 88,000 codes in ICM -10 and the Enhanced
Quality Reporting System?

Isn’t the government going
to force the decisions of the Independent Physician Advisory Board on
physicians?

Now the government wants to
force physicians to accept the potential liability for not using their medical
judgment.

This is not aligning physician
incentives with efficient treatment cost. It is dictating medical treatment to
physicians.

This is putting physicians
well on the Road to Serfdom.

Physicians are getting
tired of all of this. They are about to quit treating Medicare patients.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

The Healthcare Insurance Industry Abandons Selling The Individual Insurance Policies In Health Insurance Exchanges

   
Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 

 
 

http://youtu.be/Kyv8ZRkXnfU?t=58s

President Obama is on the campaign trail. He is selling the
virtues of Obamacare to the young uninsured.

He wants the healthy young to buy the health insurance exchange
insurance policies in order to pay for the sick. He wants to prevent
Obamacare’s failure.

His speeches are political. They have little substance and are
loaded with disinformation and hyperbole.

The campaign is a political ploy to blame the Republican Party
for Obamacare’s impending failure.

Last week Harry Reid said he has to increase taxes by another
trillion dollars. This increase will make the economy worse, not better.

When is the public going to learn that socialism doesn’t work?
Taxing and spending does not improve economic growth. Socialism and increased
taxes stifle innovation and productivity.

I think it is time for a
couple of Ayn Rand’s truisms as they apply to Obamacare. Men pursue their
vested interests. They resist being forced to follow orders that contradict
their vested interests. The key in any system success is to align all the
stakeholders’ vested interests. Obamacare does not achieve this goal.

“It only
stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the
sacrificial offerings.”

Where
there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of
sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.

Ayn
Rand

America is going through a period of
time where it is evident that something is wrong.  Americans and the traditional media are keeping
our eyes wide closed.

The hardest thing to
explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see.

Ayn Rand

Peggy Noonan said it in a paragraph
in this weekend's blog.

"One irony here
is that the Obama White House, always keen to increase the reach and power of
government, also seems profoundly disinterested in good governing
. It is
strange. The long-term project of liberalism involves encouraging the idea of
faith in government as a bringer or guarantor of greater justice. But who needs
more government if government works so very badly, and is in its operations
unjust?"

"This White
House is careless with the reputation of government. They are a campaigning
organization, not a governing one."

Ayn
Rand goes on to say,

 “You
can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”


Ayn
Rand

 A problem occurs when
constituents finally realize government is not defending its vested interests.
Change is demanded.

Americans are finally
waking up.  

We have seen this phenomenon
in my last two articles when I wrote that unions and hospitals finally realized
that Obamacare does not serve their vested interests.

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2013/07/obamacares-games-for-stakeholders-and-the-unintended-consequences.html

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2013/07/hospital-systems-are-finally-realizing-there-are-problems-with-obamacare.html

This is also the reason
Aetna decided to not sell healthcare insurance policies in the California’s
health insurance exchange.

 

 “Aetna Inc.  will stop selling
health insurance to individual consumers in California at the end of the year,
withdrawing as the federal health law is expected to reshape the market in
2014.”

Aetna did not comment on
the reasons it is dropping out of the individual market in California.

“A company spokeswoman declined
to comment about the reasons for Aetna's individual-business withdrawal.”

The dominos are starting
to fall as more healthcare insurers realize what is going on.

“Aetna isn't one of the 13
insurers participating in the California state's new consumer insurance
marketplace set to launch this fall under the federal law.”

“Like several other major
national carriers, it has said it would join only a limited number of these
exchanges. A carrier can still offer consumer plans without being in the
exchange.”

President Obama and other supporters argue that the health
insurance exchange is a success because it is encouraging competition and
pushing down prices. It is not true.

 “Insurance-industry experts say
similar moves by other carriers in other states may emerge
in coming months, as
companies with limited market share decide to avoid the uncertainty tied to the
law's changes.”

The Obama administration’s concept of competition and price
reduction is tenuous. President Obama and other CMS official keep saying that
healthcare insurance prices will decrease.

The healthcare insurance industry originally calculated it would
make a killing by selling insurance through the healthcare insurance exchanges.

As the rules and regulations for health insurance exchanges are
slowly rolled out by the administration is it clear to the health insurance
industry they could get killed by selling insurance in the health insurance
exchanges.

The addition of a 3.5% tax on each policy sold is enough for the
insurance industry to realize the health insurance exchanges will cause them to
lose money.

These surprises do not serve the vested interests of the
healthcare insurance industry.

The Obama administration keeps announcing that health insurance
exchanges are decreasing healthcare premiums.

The public and businesses are experiencing double-digit
increases in healthcare insurance premiums since Obamacare was passed.

 The reason is clear. The increases are the result of all the additional
benefits President Obama brags about in his public relations campaign.

Obamacare contains community ratings for pre existing illness
and parental insurance for young adults under twenty-six.

These are important policies. The problem is it leads to an
increase in premiums for everyone.

Healthcare premiums have already increased 20- 30% since the
passage of Obamacare. BlueCross Blue Shield of Tennessee just announced,

 BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee expects a 20 to 30 percent
increase in rates in the individual market starting next year and a 10 percent
increase in the small group market.”


“BlueCross BlueShield exec warns of
health care cost ‘explosion.’
 

A healthcare Insurance CE0 told a business group at the Nashville Area Chamber
of Commerce
that health care reform will cause “a lot of disruption in the
marketplace.”

The premium hikes will
be needed to offset new taxes
 on insurance payers such as his, he said.

We are getting
ready to have a health care cost explosion
,”  

“Details on the plans being offered on the exchanges, including
affordability, aren't yet known, but 
John
Maki
, vice president of regional sales at BlueCross
BlueShield of Tennessee
, said the company is looking at
offering traditional PPO plans, HSA-compatible plans and several other
"unique plan designs."

Only two commercial carriers have
applied to sell health insurance on Tennessee's new federally run insurance
exchange. They do not know if their submissions will be accepted. The deadline
for submission by other companies has passed.

Meanwhile, a New York Times editorial is conditioning Obamacare
fans as to who is to blame for the failure of the health insurance exchanges
. The
Times is putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of the Republican Party.

“To their shame and discredit, Republicans are trying to block
efforts to inform people
about the law and are using scare tactics to keep them
from enrolling.”

This is a typical Obama
administration tactic to blame the other guy for the impending failure of its
policy.

Obamacare is failing under
its own weight and the administration’s inability to implement the law.

The New York Times goes on,

The Republican mantra is that the nation will face economic and
medical catastrophe
— a “train wreck,” they say — unless health care reform is
stopped in its tracks.”

Obamacare is a train wreck. Max
Baucus Senator Democrat from Montana and author of Obamacare and head of the
finance committee said it.

Top officials in Ohio
and Indiana who oppose the law have issued dire, misleading forecasts
— roundly
debunked by analysts — that the law will raise premiums to astronomical levels.”

“roundly debunked by analysts”  This is not true. The Obama
administration’s analysis is biased and selective. By stating the analysis as a
fact the New York Times’ editorial board is expressing their bias without facts.

The New
York Times is once again acting as a shill for the Obama administration.  The New York Times is misleading the public.

Obamacare
is a bad law. It does not align any of the stakeholders’ vested interests. All the stakeholders are starting to realize it.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Hospital Systems Are Finally Realizing There Are Problems With Obamacare

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

Hospital systems loved the prospect
of Obamacare. Physicians would be forced into full time salaried hospital
system positions. Hospital systems would own physicians’ intellectual property
and surgical skills.

Physicians would be the hospital
systems’ cash cow. Its brick and mortar model was failing. Surgery and recovery
from surgery was improving. Length of hospital stays was decreasing.

The problem hospital systems were
discovering was that physicians were not as productive when salaried as they
were when they owned their own practices.

Surgery was being performed as
outpatient surgery in freestanding surgery centers. Physicians own most of
these surgery centers independent of hospital systems.

The advantage of these outpatient
surgery centers to patients is they are cheaper, price transparent and have
comparable outcomes.


The healthcare insurance industry has
even encouraged their use. The Obama administration doesn’t like them because they
encourage patient choice and independence.
This is the opposite of Obamacare's goal of government dependence and control of patient choice.

Hospital systems thought Obamacare
would provide millions of newly insured patients. This would translate to
higher profits for the hospital systems.

Obamacare’s supposed
goal was
improving access to care for low-income families and individuals. Hospital systems were led to believe that they would treat more
patients with health insurance through expanded Medicaid eligibility.

With the
introduction of health insurance exchanges, low-income individuals would be
able to purchase healthcare insurance coverage at a subsidized rate.

The subsidy would
come in the form of a tax credit. Hospital systems did not realize that low-income
families do not pay taxes so they would not pay any tax to apply a tax credit.
These families making up to $38,000 dollars a year could not afford the lowest
insurance of $12,000 dollars a year. They would opt to not buy the health
insurance exchange offerings.

The health
insurance exchanges would not reduce the amount of uncompensated care provided
by the nation's hospitals.

Suddenly hospital
systems realized that their hospital consultants were wrong.  While it sounded good on paper, many hospital
finance administrators are terrified that Obamacare will result in a hospital
system taking great losses as a result of decreased reimbursement and a
decrease in the promised insured population.

Tim
Nguyen, corporate controller at Palomar Health, a San Diego–based system with
690 licensed acute care hospital beds and $2.5 billion in gross annual revenue
,
says there is a catch-22 built into the healthcare legislation that will
ultimately hurt hospital systems.”

 There is another catch to Obamacare. I cannot
tell if this was an unintended consequence or purposeful deception by the Obama
administration.  The exchanges will have
different tiers with different deductibles and copays.

California's
health exchanges will have four tiers when the program goes live in January
2014, Nguyen explains: platinum (where the patient pays 10% of total healthcare
expenses); gold (20%); silver (30%); and bronze (40%).”

"These
patients will still be responsible to pay
, and they probably don't make that
much money and are likely to choose the silver or bronze tier to keep the
premiums low. … That will increase our bad debt even though they have
insurance."

The low- income
families will believe they have good insurance coverage. If they get sick they
will be responsible for the high deductibles and co-pays.

If they choose to buy
the insurance they will use the hospital facilities without realizing that the
insurance does not cover everything.

 After hospitalization
they will be hit with a bill they cannot afford. The hospital system will
pursue payment but will not be able to collect. The hospital will have to write
it off.

 There is total
uncertainty about the rules. However, before a hospital system should accept
the program they should know the rules. Their participation can ruin them financially.

Marlene Zurack is senior vice president of
finance and chief financial officer for New York City Health and Hospitals
Corporation (HCC). HCC is a municipal integrated healthcare delivery system
with $7.1 billion in total operating revenue when combined with HHC's MetroPlus
health plan.

HCC cares for indigent and low-income
patients. It is subsidized by the Medicaid's Disproportionate Share Hospital
program.


She is doubtful that the insurance exchanges
will result in a net benefit to her organization. She insures 1.4 million
people. The systems treat 475,000 uninsured patients. She has two problems with
the health insurance exchanges.

She does not know how many of the uninsured
will get insurance, what level of insurance will they buy and how much of a
difference the insurance payment is from the Medicaid's Disproportionate Share
Hospital program.

“HHC
is likely to lose revenue in the end
, Zurack says, due to cuts being made to
Medicaid's Disproportionate Share Hospital program, which distributes payments
to qualifying hospitals that serve a large number of uninsured individuals.”

In
reality, Zurack says, the cuts will be extremely damaging to hospitals that
serve this population.

New York City Health and Hospital Corporation
is scheduled to lose $17.1 billion dollars between 2014 and 2020 due to federal
cuts In the Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital program.

Obamacare is becoming a reality. Hospital
systems such as HCC are realizing the financial impact of Obamacare.

Accountable
Care Organizations are Obamacare’s signature tool to improve access to care and
decrease the cost of care.

The promise to hospital
systems’ is that by increasing efficiency ACOs could increase hospital systems’ profit.

Incorporated into the ACO scheme
is profit sharing with the government if there are reduced costs. Included is
reduction in payment if costs exceed benchmark costs.

Only 10% of hospital systems
have signed up in the last two years. The Obama administration has done a lot
of bragging about enrollment
.

Originally there were thirty-two “Pioneer”
hospital systems. The Mayo Clinic and the Cleveland Clinic rejected being
Pioneer participants. The goal of ACOs is to develop integrated care delivery
systems.

Last week 9 of the original 32
Pioneer ACOs withdrew from the original program.
CMS gave no explanation for
them leaving.

I believe they realized they
couldn’t integrate their delivery system the way the government wants.

They cannot make any money
participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

Seven of the nine are applying to transition
to the Medicare Shared Savings Program, while two are abandoning the program
completely. CMS declined to identify which ACOs are leaving the Pioneer program
and which are simply shifting to the MSSP.

 The nine departing
ACOs are
:

  • Prime Care Medical Network Inc., an IPA-based ACO serving San
    Bernadino and Riverside counties in California.
  • University of Michigan Health System in Ann Arbor.
  • Physician Health Partners LLC, a medical management company in
    Denver.
  • Seton Health Alliance, a network of providers comprised in the
    11-county Austin area.
  • "Plus ACO," a partership between North Texas Specialty
    Physicians and Texas Health Resources
  • Healthcare Partners Nevada ACO LLC, a multispecialty medical
    group and IPA serving Clark and Nye counties in Nevada
  • Healthcare Partners California ACO LLC, a multispecialty medical
    group and IPA serving Los Angeles and Orange counties in California.
  • JSA Care Partners LLC, a primary medical group and IPA serving
    the Orlando, Tampa and South Florida area.
  • Presbyterian Healthcare Services, an integrated delivery system
    serving the Albuquerque area.

 “Plus
ACO”, a partnership between Texas Health Resources and North Texas Specialty
Physicians
, has plans to leave the Pioneer ACO program by mid-August, but the
two organizations say they are open to "remaining in the Pioneer ACO
program if we can find an economically viable way to do so."

 ACO’s are doomed. Obamacare is falling apart.

President Obama immediately went on the campaign
trail telling the country how great Obamacare is already.  

 
 

http://youtu.be/Kyv8ZRkXnfU?t=58s

He continues to ignore problems with Obamacare’s implementation
and costs. He has no regard for America’s financial stability.

Americans’ are starting to understand his attitude.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

President Obama – Do Something That Could Work!

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The solution to repairing the healthcare system is simple. The
healthcare system must be consumer driven. If consumers were in control of their
healthcare dollars and were responsible for their health and their healthcare
choices the cost of the healthcare system would decrease to manageable levels.

My ideal Medical Savings Account puts the consumer in charge. Its
success is totally dependent on real transparency by all stakeholders including
healthcare insurance companies, hospital systems and physicians. 

A Health Savings Account does not give consumers enough of an
incentive
to shop for price and quality with the present lack of transparency.
In a transparent healthcare system Medical Saving Accounts would provide more
incentive than Health Savings Accounts.  

Presently President Obama is trying to eliminate Health Savings
Accounts. HSAs are the single greatest threat to his goal for a single party
payer system. They are also the fastest growing healthcare insurance product.

The lack of transparency for hospitals, healthcare insurance
companies, drug companies and physicians must be eliminated. The public must
demand that the healthcare insurance industry make their expenses transparent
so that its exorbitant salaries and profits can be clearly understood.   

There is no reason that this one stakeholder receives 40% of
every premium dollar
spent either by private corporations or the government.
The medical loss ratio as it is presently constructed by the Obama
administration provides 20% for expenses. The other 20% of the $40% is in the
direct patient care column.

The government should help consumers understand these prices and
understand the measurement of quality. Consumers of healthcare must be turned
into Prosumers of healthcare (Productive Consumers.)

When this happens the consumers can become independent
intelligent consumers. Consumers will become independent of government and its
bureaucracy.

The Obama administration wants consumers to be more dependent on
government not less dependent.

Intelligent independent Consumers will force the other
stakeholders to be competitive. Competition will drive healthcare costs down.

Government cost controls will not drive prices down. They will
simply distort prices and cause more spending.

Private sources such as Angie’s list help consumers decide on
which plumber to hire. It is important and creates competition and price
lowering. However the defect in Angie’s list is that it is based on other
consumers’ opinions.

It is not based on specific costs or origins of the cost to the
plumber or the measurement of the plumber’s skill. It only deals with price and
consumer satisfaction. Angie’s list does make plumbers competitive.

Competition for consumers will bring down the cost of healthcare.
 By forcing consolidation of doctors and
hospitals Obamacare will decrease competition and increase prices.

 Healthcare
policy wonks dismiss this concept because they believe consumers are not smart
enough or interested enough in learning to be intelligent healthcare consumers.
They are wrong.

Their thnking is correct if a system exists where consumers are
spending other people’s money. Obamacare is such a system. It will drive costs
up just as the private first dollar coverage system has driven healthcare
prices up.

There is no financial incentive for healthcare consumers to try
to save money and preserve their health.

Obamacare is a huge entitlement with an overwhelming budget that
will be impossible to execute. We have seen that to be true with ever increasing
waivers and the most recent delay in the mandate until 2015.  There will be delays in other critical
portions of Obamacare in the near future. It could be delayed forever because
it cannot be executed.

In my last blog I forgot to mention the delay in forming and
activating the Independent Physician Advisory Board.

Last year I wrote about the Obama administration’s infatuation
with the Canadian Healthcare System. I reviewed the 2011 Fraser report
explaining that the Canadian Healthcare System is unsustainable.


I also wrote about Canadian consumers’ healthcare experiences in
two provinces I visited.  The fact is the
system doesn’t work well and is unsustainable.

The Fraser Institute in a
2011 report concluded that Canada’s health care
system is spending money at an unsustainable rate
. Six of ten Canadian
provinces are on track to spend half of their revenues on health care,
according to the institute.

“In 2011, health care
spending consumed 50 percent of revenues in Canada’s two largest provinces,
Ontario and Quebec.

By 2017, four more
provinces — Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and New Brunswick — will
spend half of their revenues on health care, according to the institute.

Total federal, provincial
and territorial government health spending has grown by 8.1 percent annually.
Canada’s GDP increased by 6.7 percent during the same period. The math is
obvious. The Canadian healthcare entitlement system is not working.

“In response to the rapidly
rising costs, provincial governments have raised taxes and rationed care,
increasing patient wait times. Provincial drug plans have also more often refused
to pay for most of the drugs that are certified as “safe and effective” by
Health Canada.

“Unsustainable rates of
growth in health care spending crowd out the resources available for other
purposes including education, public safety, and economic growth-enhancing tax
relief,” Fraser Institute Senior Fellow Nadeem Esmail told The Daily Caller
News Foundation in an email.”

Only 20% of the people utilize the healthcare system at any on
time. If consumers know they are entitled to healthcare and the healthcare
system will fix them if they get sick, consumers of healthcare feel protected. The
feelings of eighty percent of consumers who are not sick believe the system is
great until they have to interact with the system. In this system of
entitlement consumers have a tendency to not take care of their health.  This makes them more likely to interact with
the system in the future when they are very sick. The result is increasing
healthcare costs.

Once an entitlement is created it is almost impossible to
eliminate it even though it has proved ineffective and costly.

England’s NHS has shown this to be true. The NHS is struggling
right now to modify the NHS so it works
better for physicians and patients.
However, the new reform rules have been contaminated with so many amendments
that I suspect no progress will be made
.

Consumers are realizing that Obamacare is much too complicated
and impossible to execute. Rather than demanding repeal and eliminating the
concept of instituting an entitlement program, the New York Times is publishing
letters from readers that are demanding a single party payer system to simplify
the system.

Let us stop making the same mistakes over and over again.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

An Interesting Unintended Consequence of Obamacare

Stanley
Feld M.D.,FACP , MACE

 The Obama administration has encouraged local hospital systems
throughout the United States to consolidate physicians practicing in their
hospitals.

Hospital systems have found this attractive. There has been a
movement to buy physicians’ practices and then pay physicians a salary.
This
has been encouraged by the Obama administration because someone in the
administration believes this will encourage physicians to stop over testing.

Hospital systems love it because they understand that brick and
mortar facilities are not worth as much as they use to be. If they own
physicians’ intellectual property in the form of primary care physicians and
skills in the form of surgeons, the value of the hospital system increases. 

It has not worked out as well as many hospital systems would
like
because when physicians worked for themselves they were more productive
than when they worked for the hospital system.

The Obama administration also believes that it can bundle the
payment of a treatment and share the savings with the hospital system if the
treatment costs less. If the treatment uses more assets and costs more the
hospital system will not be paid.

In other words, the government and the healthcare insurance
industry want to offload the risk of treatment to the hospital system. They
administration thinks this will force hospital systems to deliver a better
quality of care. You may recall quality of care has not been defined
adequately.

The example often used is the non-payment for hospital
readmissions within thirty days.

This policy doesn’t work because reasons for hospital
readmissions are multifactorial. Many of those factors are uncontrollable. One
hospital system can also divert the patient to another hospital system or treat
the readmitted patient in the emergency room.

The Obama administration is encouraging Accountable Care
Organizations
. There are so many problems in forming, administrating and
managing ACOs that they are destined to fail.

Anyone reading the administration’s propaganda would not think
so, but it is true, and as time goes on it will become apparent.

Finally, hospital systems and physician groups are realizing the
negotiating power they are accumulating by consolidating and integrating
physicians’ practices.

Consolidation is not good
for the patients. It is great for the hospital system and the large independent
physician specialty groups. Physicians who have sold their practices to
hospital systems will not do so well because the hospital systems are in
control of the collections and salaries.

Large medical specialty groups are negotiating with Obamacare’s
new healthcare plans. These providers are demanding, and in some cases
securing, pretty rich reimbursement rates from the new Obamacare health plans.

It is the same thing that happened in the 1980’s when HMOs
negotiated high reimbursement deals with medical and surgical specialists the
HMO wanted in the group.
The HMO’s reasons were to promote the HMO’s brand and
to get better medical results for the patients they had enrolled.

“To take care
of patients that will be covered by the new insurance scheme
, these providers
are requesting payment rates that are higher than what they're being offered by
Medicare. Some providers are even insisting on premiums over what they're paid
by the existing private, employer-based health plans.”

Hospital systems in a town they dominate are doing the same
thing. The result will be an increase in the costs to the government and the
healthcare insurance companies. They will pass the increased costs on to the
consumers.

“Some of the
Obamacare plans, stuck in markets where there are few competing groups of
providers to choose among, are being forced to accept these high prices.”

The Obama administration told us, at the passage of Obamacare,
that providers would be discounting to get the volume of business that
Obamacare offered as the new legislation banded large groups of patients into
statewide insurance pools.

The defective central premise was that Obamacare would entice
providers to take lower reimbursement because of increased volume.  

“The people
that now seem most likely to enter these state-based insurance pools, and buy
the new coverage, represent a costly mix of patients with a lot of pre-existing
medical conditions. The volume is also unlikely to materialize.”

Obamacare has tripped over its central premise. It is not going
to lower costs. It is going to raise costs.

Obamacare has stimulated the consolidation of hospitals and
physician groups that's now rampant in healthcare. This consolidation is
starting to give providers leverage over Obamacare’s health plans.

This unintended consequence of Obamacare was obvious to most
healthcare policy thinkers who believe that control and planning do not work.
Unfortunately, President Obama did not listen to them.

The other thing President Obama did not listen to is that Health
Maintenance Organizations (HMO’s) of the 1980 and 1990s did not work. Obamacare
is a HMO on steroids
.  

 “Under the scheme, doctors are paid lump sums of money to care
for large groups of patients.

The idea is to put the financial risk on the doctor for the
cost of the medical care that they deliver
. This was a central premise for how
Obamacare would put financial pressure on providers as a way to help to lower
healthcare costs.”

Physicians and Hospital Systems have been to this movie before. 

Hospital Systems are making believe they are taking Obamacare’s
financial bait. They are using the concept to frighten physicians and buying
local medical practices.

Hospital systems’ goal is to get a geographic monopoly then take
advantage of the negotiating monopoly. Physician groups especially specialty
groups will stay independent of hospital systems, integrate practices and get
in a negotiating reimbursement.

This will increase the cost of medical care. Everyone knows all
healthcare is local. Central control of healthcare is innately flawed. 

This is one of the many defects in Obamacare’s structure.

Obamacare has dismantled the last vestiges of local competition
among physicians for patients.

Now Obamacare will have to deal with the physician and hospital
system cartels it has created.

 The victims in all of this are patients
and the cost of patient care.

The Obama administration’s public service campaign is starting
to sell Obamacare’s virtues to young people through the NFL, NBA and major
league baseball. It is also signing up non suspecting consumers at supermarkets and churches.

Good luck. I think everyone is starting to catch on.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Where Is Obamacare’s Transparency?

 Stanley Feld M.D., FACP,MACE

As we get closer to the implementation date of Obamacare it becomes
more and more obvious that there are more and more things we do not know about
the law.

Something we do know is that the law gives all the decision-making discretion
to the head of the Department of Health and Human Services. This is an obvious
defect in Obamacare as new regulations are produced by the Secretary of HHS
daily.

The Health and Human Services Department is
the most secretive department in the government.

The new rules are a huge black box
secret. The steps being taken to implement Obamacare have also been a secret.
None of what is going on with Obamacare is transparent. 

Health and Human Services has not
provided coherent answers to congressional oversight committees that have
requested answers to certain questions. Neither have comprehensive answers to
questions been provided to the press.

The Government Accountability Office
released the results of two investigations of Obamacare. The implementation of
Obamacare has blown deadlines and has improvised on regulation. There has been general
chaos at HHS.

The GAO said HHS isn't close to being ready to launch in October.
The Obama administration has told
congress and the press that it will be ready.

HHS has already announced it is throwing in the
towel on small business health insurance exchanges. These exchanges were
supposed to allow employees to choose from competing healthcare insurance
plans.

These small business health insurance exchanges have been put off
for at least one year. It is not clear whether these exchanges are the same as
those that are supposed to launch on October 1,2014.

The employees must choose from their employer’s private
plan options. However it is not clear if employers are going to stop offering
healthcare coverage and pay the “tax” penalty Obamacare imposes.

Employees will have to buy healthcare insurance
from the health insurance exchanges with after tax dollars. Prior to Obamacare employers
bought healthcare insurance with pre-tax dollars.

This is another Obamacare hidden tax increase.

If everyone is driven into health insurance exchanges
and the healthcare industry drops out of the health insurance exchange because
of the tax it will have to pay for every policy sold, America will have a
single party payer (the government) system by default.

This is President Obama’s goal.

The healthcare insurance industry will continue to
make its money with a single party payer because it is the government’s
administrative service provider. As administrator service providers the healthcare
insurance industry still takes its 40% off the top.

Consumers will be the ones that get penalized
through increased taxes.

HHS will be forced to run 34 of the 50 health
insurance exchanges and pay for the cost overruns expected. These cost overruns
are not in the healthcare budget. There are more than 100 “key activities”
necessary to set up exchanges.

Sixteen states have opted to run their own exchange
and take the money the federal government has offered. These states still have
between 16-52% of the key activities undone in order to qualify as a health
insurance exchange.

The complete set of regulations for these
key activities has not been completely written by HHS.

Two states, Massachusetts and Utah, have had functioning   health
insurance exchanges. These exchanges were developed pre Obamacare. These
exchanges might have to be redone once all the rules and regulations are
written and federal requirements are known.

“If HHS had any appreciation for basic accountability it would
release the facts itself instead of going dark and running ObamaCare as a
black-ops mission.

“HHS has insurance premium filings for the 34 federal exchanges
but it decreed in a May memo that it would keep that information secret until
September.”

“Could it be that the department doesn't want people to know about
the coming "rate shock" like that in California?”

The traditional
media have declared that there will be lower rates in the health insurance
exchange in California. The facts are the opposite.

An interesting observation using the Covered California calculator is
that a family earning  $38,000 a year would
be entitled to a tax credit of $11,448 after they file their tax return for the
previous year. The yearly outlay for the health insurance exchange silver plan
for this family of four would be $13,164.

This family would have a theoretical cost of $1716 dollars per year for
silver plan healthcare insurance plus deductibles which are significant.

This family making $38,000 a year pays no income tax. I tried to figure
out how the government applies the tax credit if they pay no income tax.

Does the government write a check of $11,448 dollars for their tax
credit after they file their income tax return the following year? This is not
the definition of a tax credit.

This family earning $38,000 a
year cannot afford to pay the $1,097 a month for the insurance the first year.
It is thirty-three percent of their salary.

Second, the tax credit is worthless because they do not pay any tax to
be credited.

I wonder if Kathleen Sibelius thought of this?

The health insurance exchanges developed so far are
experiencing massive cost overruns.

The CBO originally estimated that setting up all the 50
exchanges would cost $5-10 billion dollars. California has spent $900 million
dollars so far and they are not completely set up.

The Obama administration has been taking money out of other
federal health budgets to find more money to help states develop the health
insurance exchanges.

“In June Kaiser
Family Foundation health tracking poll—which also found that public support for
ObamaCare hit a new post-passage low of 35%—reports that nearly one of three
Americans between the ages of 18 and 30 do not believe that insurance "is
worth the money it costs."

 “And persuading young, healthy people to sign
up for coverage requires them to act against their own economic interest,
since
they can always enroll later when they need it as a result of ObamaCare's
mandates.”

The health insurance plans are expensive and the exchanges will
malfunction. Physicians won’t participate because the reimbursement fees have
not been published. If someone files a claim wrong, they will not get paid. 

These are just a few of the issues that can and will come up
that have not been explained.

The public must become
aware of the facts and not buy into the Obama administration propaganda
campaign that Obamacare is the greatest.

It is time for Americans to stop being passive. The protest
must start now before implementation is a disaster and taxes and premiums
escalate because of massive cost overruns.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

  • natural garcinia

    I think that what you published made a ton of sense. However, consider this, what if you were to write a awesome headline? I mean, I don’t want to tell you how to run your website, but what if you added a post title to possibly get a person’s attention? I mean Repairing the Healthcare System: Where Is Obamacare’s Transparency? is a little plain. You could glance at Yahoo’s home page and note how they write post headlines to get people interested. You might add a video or a pic or two to get readers interested about everything’ve written. In my opinion, it would make your posts a little livelier.

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Games On!

Stanley Feld
M.D.,FACP,MACE

Articles
about the virtues of Obamacare are appearing almost daily. It is pretty clear that
the information is being fed to the media by the Obama administration.

The
problem is the sound bites are not truthful. The best sound bites are in the
Obama administration has to offer are in play. All the virtues expressed about
Obamacare are expensive and un-executable by the Obama administration.

On June 16th
Timothy Egan was called on to spin the Obamacare tale in the New York Times.

He lauded
the virtues of Obamacare while executing the blame game once again. He starts
by describing an under 26 year old with Hodgkin’s lymphoma who was treated to
remission using his parents’ employer provided healthcare insurance.

The parents’
employer’s healthcare insurance premiums increased the past few years since it
is the law under Obamacare to cover children until they are 26 years old. The
coverage pre Obamacare covered only up to 18 years old.

Here is
the blame game.

“But he’s (the under 26 year old) still a pariah in the eyes
of the insurance industry, which means they can deny him a policy that might
save his life.

Not for long. In six months’ time, the heartless practice of
refusing to let sick people buy affordable health insurance — private-sector
death panels, the most odious kind of American exceptionalism — will be illegal
from shore to shore.”

Timothy Eagan’s example is true. However,
Obamacare’s most disturbing
feature is the Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB, sometimes called a
"death panel," threatens to nullify Mr. Eagan’s euphoria for
Obamacare.

Maybe this person will not get approved for retreatment if
the determination for retreatment is not cost effective according to the IPAB

A vivid example of government’s control over an individual’s
personal life and death decisions is the rules that bared access by 10-year old
Sarah Murnaghan to the adult lung-transplant list.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius refused
to waive rules made by bureaucrats to permit this 10 year old a lung
transplant. 

Who knows what can happen when the power to make rules and
enforce them is in the hands of a bureaucracy? Bureaucracies have a tendency to
create rules in which no one has to take responsibility for decisions that affect
others’ lives and personal freedoms.

It is obvious that the grip of the bureaucracy will clamp
down much harder once the Independent Payment Advisory Board gets going in the
next two years. There will be no going back.

The Obamacare’s IPAB is not answerable to any one.

Cost will be an issue in the bureaucratic IPAB’s decision-making process
and not the patient’s vested interests.

Timothy Eagan goes on to say,

“The early indications are that most Americans will be
pleasantly surprised. Millions of people, shopping and comparing prices on the
exchanges set up by the states, are likely to get far better coverage for the
same — or less — money than they pay now.

There is no data for this statement except the
misinformation and number fudging done by California Covered. The costs in
California will be outrageous.

The state of Washington also published disinformation
about the cost of care under their health insurance exchange.

 The law, as honest
conservatives predicted, before they orphaned their own idea, is injecting
competition into a market dominated by a few big names.

Washington only has one insurance company signed up.

The real number prediction for Washington's health insurance exchange is that even in over-regulated
Washington State, Obamacare will increase individual health insurance premiums
by 34-80%

What will happen if, in the end, Obamacare really works?”

The early indications from the State of California and Paul
Krugman are misleading and dead wrong
. I have pointed out that in an earlier
article. Obamacare is going to be a train wreck both financially and medical
care wise.

In additional, the Obama administration has to build 34 of
its own health insurance exchanges. It couldn’t suck 34 states into the Obamacare
overspending mud hole.

Auditors at the Government Accountability Office released
the results of two investigations. It optimistically concluded that it
"cannot yet be determined" if Obamacare will be ready for enrollment
a mere four months from now.

The health insurance exchanges are supposed to open October
1. The administration insists that it will.

The GAO's
detailed portrait of blown deadlines, regulatory improvisation and general
chaos explains why HHS has been anti-transparent.
 

HHS will run 34
federal versions in whole or part as Governors continue their Obamacare
resistance.

Some of the health insurance exchange preparations have
barely begun. The Obama administration has already blamed it on conservatives
and Republicans.

The GAO attempted to track "key activities"
necessary to set up exchanges and identified "more than 100." But the
auditors can't give a precise number because "the nature of the activities
that [HHS] and the states will conduct has not been finalized and may continue
to evolve."

Mr. Eagan then criticizes
Republicans.

They
have good reason to fear it: if Obamacare works, the game will be over for
those who oppose the most significant change in American life in a generation’s
time.”

The chance that Obamacare
will work is minimal. In either case it will be the most significant change in
American life in a generation’s time.

Ben Carson M.D.  has a very
practical comment about the health insurance exchanges.

Obamacare will be a disastrous
change and the Democrats will try to blame its failure on Republicans. It has
nothing to do with Republicans. It is simply a law that is destined to be a
train wreck.

Obamacare cannot be executed
and America cannot afford the cost of Obamacare.

Young people will not buy
individual insurance from the health insurance exchanges.

The young individuals who
do not receive healthcare coverage from their employer are not stupid. It makes little financial
sense for them to subsidize the medical care of others given the choice.

The traditional media is
getting nervous as they see President Obama using them to promote Obamacare and
convince young healthy people to join with a campaign of disinformation.

The media have lately
emphasized the real challenge of enticing healthy young adults to sign up for
Obamacare. Obamacare needs these young people to sign up and buy the insurance.

The states that have signed
on to the health insurance exchanges and the federal government are counting on
young people who are healthy to make Obamacare work.

Obamacare will not work even if they sign up. President Obama will
have to impose more and more taxes as hiddden taxes and means tested taxes as
there are more and more shortfalls.

This has been the destiny of all entitlement states and countries. These
higher taxes will have a devastating effect on the economy and economic growth.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

The problem is that as the Obama administration and
its media surrogates tell lies they start believing these lies until the devastation
hits.

Devastation of the healthcare system, the economy and
the financial structure is closer than they think.

 

  • Eugene Charter Service

    Everything is very open with a clear clarification of the challenges. It was definitely informative. Your site is very helpful. Many thanks for sharing!

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

The Obamacare Public Relations Offensive Is In Full Swing

Stanley
Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The Obama
Administration promised us a full offensive to promote Obamacare. It is now in
full swing. The Obama administration is using traditional media outlet to
promote the greatness of Obamacare.

The main
outlet so far has been the New York Times. Paul Krugman had two articles filled
with misinformation and misdirection.

On
June 12th a Bloomberg News article was “Obamacare Shows Hospital Savings
as Patients Make Gains.”

In the opening
sentences the statement “Hospitals
are improving care and saving millions of dollars with one of the least touted
but potentially most effective provisions of the law”
is made.

“252 hospitals and physician groups
across the U.S. have signed up to join the administration’s 
accountable care program,
in which they share the financial risk of keeping patients healthy.”

One can conclude this is a
spin article from the first two paragraphs of the Bloomberg News article.

How can one know hospitals
are improving care and savings millions of dollars when measurements are not
going to start being made until after January 1,2014.

Second, there are 252
hospitals and physician groups across U.S. that have signed up to join the
Obama administration Accountable Care Organization's program (ACO).

This statement generated
two questions in my mind. How many hospitals have signed up and how many
physician groups have signed up?

If they were all hospital
groups this is an extremely small number. There are a total of 5724 registered
hospitals in the U.S. of which 4973 are community hospitals. In that group
there are 2903 non-government not for profit community hospitals and 1025
Investor owned for profit community hospitals. 

 The 252 ACOs, if they are all hospital ACOs,
represent 6.4% of the total community hospitals and 8.6% of the non-profit
community hospitals.

The 252 ACOs are not a
significant number of hospitals to have signed up at this point to draw a
significant conclusion of cost saving even if the cost savings could be
measured at this point.

This article is total spin
article from a probable Obama administration press release.

The second point is why
would physicians or hospitals want to share financial risk with the government
or an insurance company when much of the risk results from patients demographic
and behavior.

Risk assessment is the
healthcare insurance industry’s job not the responsibility of hospitals or
physicians’

Another article that
appeared in the New York Times was “What Sweden Can Tell Us About Obamacare.

It starts with
the blame game scenario.  

LAST month, for the 37th time, the House of
Representatives voted to repeal Obamacare, with many Republicans saying that
its call for greater government involvement in the health care system spells
doom.

Most
progressive thinkers dislike conservative thinkers. They believe most
conservative thinkers are simplistic or dumb. The New York Times is playing to
its audience with blame game statements such as this one.

On close
inspections conservatives are neither simplistic nor dumb and statements such
as the above are not constructive. However, these comments are effective in spinning the story.

"Visiting Swedish health economists were asked to shared their thoughts about healthcare. Like economists in most other countries, they tend to be skeptical of large bureaucracies."

"So if extensive government involvement in health care is indeed a recipe for doom, they should have clear evidence of that by now."


"Yet none of them voiced the kinds of complaints about recalcitrant bureaucrats and runaway health costs."

There
is plenty of evidence that extensive government involvement in healthcare is
indeed a recipe for doom. All you have to do is look at Britain and the lack of
success of its healthcare system.

Look
at most all of the Democratic Socialist countries in Europe. They are all on
the brink of collapse with healthcare costs being a large contributory of the collapse. The only thing holding them up is the funny money they
are printing.

This
is one of the reasons America shouldn’t be printing funny money. Obamacare is going
to force us to print more funny money. It is going to drive us into the same
situation that Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain and France are in.

 When are we going to learn that socialistic entitlement
societies are not economically or financially viable?

America’s
healthcare system has problems but they are problems resulting from  not dealing with the abuse of all of the
stakeholders.

In
the next few months we are going to see more and more public service
announcements, editorials and articles promoting Obamacare with little critical
evidence proving the virtues or viability of the claims.

I
hope the public will not buy the spin. The Obamacare promotion campaign will
consist of a number of crisp sound bites. The sound bites are backed by little
evidence that they are viable.

The
promotion campaign will also contain criticisms and attacks on the big bad
conservative Republicans. The Republicans will be accused of having a difficult
time thinking critically or understanding the big picture.

Maybe
this time the public won’t fall for the spin and misinformation.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

More Disinformation From Paul Krugman

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE

I
just finished watching the movie “Wag The Dog” starring Dustin Hoffman, Robert
DeNiro, Anne Heche, and Woody Harrelson. It is movie worth seeing again to
understand the Obama administrations campaign to promote Obamacare.

 Idiom
Definitions for 'Wag the dog'


To
'wag the dog' means to purposely divert attention from what would otherwise be
of greater importance, to something else of lesser significance. By doing so,
the lesser-significant event is catapulted into the limelight, drowning proper
attention to what was originally the more important issue.

Just days before a presidential election, a Washington,
D.C.
spin doctor, distracts the electorate from
a sex
scandal
by hiring a Hollywood film producer to construct a fake war with Albania.
 

Paul
Krugman’s recent Obamacare article contains multiple misdirections and
half-truths.
It offers fictitious examples that when stitched together sound as
if Obamacare is the greatest thing that ever happened to the American people.

Nothing
could be further from the truth.

Paul
Krugman declares that healthcare reform has worked in Massachusetts since 2006.
Therefore, Obamacare, which is essentially the same program, can work in the
rest of the nation.

Massachusetts has had
essentially this system since 2006; 
as a result, nearly all residents have health
insurance, and the program remains very popular. So we know that ObamaCare —
or, as some of us call it, ObamaRomneyCare — can work.

Does
Massachusetts’ healthcare reform really work?

It
is true that nearly all Massachusetts residents are insured. The Massachusetts
government subsidized healthcare insurance sold in the Massachusetts exchange.
Physicians’ and hospitals’ reimbursement is only about 10% more than what Medicaid pays.

Massachusetts
physicians seem to be less willing to see the newly insured (with exchange subsidies) than Medicaid
patients even though the reimbursement is 10% more than they recieve for
Medicaid patients.

Physicians
are also less likely to accept Medicaid patients than privately insured
patients. This has resulted in a physician shortage for recipients of Medicaid.

In
Worcester Massachusetts there is a 3 months wait to see a primary care
physician. There is scalping for physician appointments in Worcester.

Patients
make appointments and then sell those appointment times to other patients that
have to see a physician quickly. The other option is to go to the emergency
room.

Many
of the healthcare policy wonks that wrote the Massachusetts law wrote the
Obamacare law. These same healthcare policy wonks believed that once everyone
was insured, patients would go to the doctor’s office for primary care rather
than to the hospital emergency room.

There
has been a decrease in the demand for care as a result of a decrease in the supply
of physicians. The result has been that hospital emergency room
traffic is higher today
than before health reform
in
Massachusetts.

There
has been an increase in community healthcare centers manned by physician substitutes.
This traffic to community health centers is almost one-third higher than it was
before reform
.

The
time it takes to get medical care is growing in every city and town in Massachusetts.  The wait to see a new doctor in Boston today is two months.  This is the longest wait in the entire
country.

The
only thing that has changed in Massachusetts is the cost of healthcare. A few
years ago the federal government had to bail out Massachusetts before it went
bankrupt. Massachusetts received 8 billion dollars for healthcare reform from
President Obama.

 

“On
balance, the only thing that seems to have changed in Massachusetts is that
patients are waiting longer.
They are going to the same places to get care that
they went to before. They are getting the same care
from the same providers
. In the
process, more money is being moved around. A lot more money.”

Paul
Krugman states “There are, however,
millions of Americans who don’t receive insurance either from their employers
or from government programs.”

I agree this
must be fixed. However, I believe Obamacare is going to make things worse.

They can get
insurance only by buying it on their own, and many of them are effectively shut
out of that market.”

This is
also true. However you cannot force businesses to do things they do not want to
do as Obamacare is attempting to do. You also cannot increase medical benefits
without raising healthcare insurance prices and permit the insurance industry
to take 40% off the top.

The
healthcare insurance industry will be taxed for every policy sold and the cost
will be passed on to consumers.

You also
cannot stop excessive demand for healthcare unless you provide incentives to
consumers to decrease demand. Obamacare provides incentives to increase demand
by expanding healthcare entitlements. The result will be a further increase in
federal and state taxes.

The tax
increase will further decrease investment and in turn increase unemployment.

Meanwhile
all large and small companies are decreasing full time employment to under 30
hours a week to avoid penalties for not providing healthcare insurance.

Who is
getting stuck?

Ordinary
consumers are getting stuck. Things are getting worse, not better.

In some states, like California, insurers reject applicants with past
medical problems. In others, like New York, insurers can’t reject applicants,
and must offer similar coverage regardless of personal medical history
(“community rating”).

 Community rating
is a conce
pt associated with health insurance, which
requires health insurance providers to offer
health insurance policies within a given territory at the same price to all
persons without medical
underwriting
, regardless of their health status.

Pure
community rating prohibits insurance rate variations based on demographic
characteristics such as age or gender, whereas adjusted or modified
community rating allows insurance rate variations based on demographic
characteristics such as age or gender in a region or city.

It has nothing to do with
requiring the issuing of healthcare insurance.

 He says by having community ratings,
“it leads to a situation in which premiums are very high because only those
with current health problems sign up, while healthy people take the risk of
going uninsured.”

This is a misinformed statement. If there are
many young people in a community the insurance rates should be lower regardless
of whether they have insurance.

 The
claims experienced by the healthcare insurer will be higher if the young people
do not sign up for insurance. Therefore the healthcare industry wants to set
prices on claims not community performance.

Again,
the government should not be able to force consumers to purchase a product they
do not want. The Supreme Court said the government could tax consumers if they
do not purchase healthcare insurance.

If the
tax is 10% of the cost of insurance and you cannot afford the insurance you
would pay the penalty and forgo the insurance. A consumer would also try to
avoid the penalty.

Paul
Krugman proclaims the principles Obamacare demands.

Obamacare closes this
gap with a three-part approach.

 First, community rating everywhere — no more
exclusion based on pre-existing conditions.

This is
good but costly unless you change the profit structure for the healthcare insurance
industry.

Second, the “mandate”
— you must buy insurance even if you’re currently healthy.

This is
against the law.

Third,
subsidies to make insurance affordable for those with lower incomes.

This
is also O.K. but it will create a situation that is unsustainable for the
federal government. The federal government is going to want to stick the
unsustainable costs on to the states after the first three years of complete
federal funding. The federal government cannot afford the first three years.

Paul
Krugman then goes on to play the very effective blame game.

“Some people are too
poor to afford coverage even with the subsidies. These Americans were supposed
to be covered by a federally financed expansion of Medicaid, but in states
where Republicans have blocked Medicaid
expansion
, such unfortunates
will be left out in the cold.”

I thought
the Obamacare was going to set up health insurance exchanges in states that
refused to participate.

 Paul Krugman goes on to say,

“There will
probably be a lot of administrative confusion as the law goes into effect,
again especially in states where Republicans have been doing their best to
sabotage the process.”

States like
Texas whose politicians are doing their best to undermine it, the sheer mean-spiritedness
of the Obamacare opponents will become ever more obvious.”

Maybe,
just maybe Texas and the governors of the other 24 states that are not
participating because they are smart. They see the coming train wreck. They
understand that Obamacare is unsustainable. They do not want to be stuck with
the obligation to adopt an unsustainable program. They want to avoid bigger
state deficits. They want to avoid raising state taxes for a program that
cannot work.

If the
Obama administration wants to execute the program let it do it on its own.

The Obama
administration has not taken steps to set up health insurance exchanges in
states that are not participating.

They are
taking steps to develop a campaign to promote Obamacare and steps to blame the
states that are not interested in participating in its demise.

Paul
Krugman is a pawn for the Obama administration. He is helping the
administration construct a similar blame game scenario that had been so
effective in passing Obamacare and in winning reelection for President Obama.

The states
that are not participating should organize and offer a strong offense
describing the obvious reasons they are not participating in the health
insurance exchanges.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.